General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOur president: The man who received 80% of the Evangelical vote and spoke at Liberty University
"... I would watch supermodels getting screwed, well-known supermodels getting screwed on a bench in the middle of the room. (Studo 54) There were seven of them and each one was getting screwed by a different guy..."
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Yeah, I'd say there's a small gap between the talk and the walk at Liberty U. I can't for the life of me imagine why that $hould be.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)had a baby out of wedlock? Could you imagine the way the right would have been howling?
deurbano
(2,895 posts)Sanders has a kid born out of wedlock, too. Obviously, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that. My first born was only born "in wedlock" because my parents dragged the sperm donor and me to Las Vegas for a sham wedding. But there certainly is quite the double standard, and-- especially in the case of these Trump loving evangelicals-- a staggering level of hypocrisy.
Solly Mack
(90,787 posts)They apply to Trump the same level of denial and hypocrisy they apply to themselves.
They are all trying. They all fall short. They are all forgiven.
You can lie, cheat, steal, and murder through the week as long as you ask for forgiveness on Sundays. Good intentions last as long as the Sunday meal flatulence, with the coming week being outside the confine of the pews. Rinse. Lather. Repeat.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,121 posts)toward women itself, so it makes sense they would support a man who brags about attacking women.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)It emerged as a group out of the pro-segregation movement and was propped up economically in its' infancy by the white middle class moving their children from public schools to church-run segregation academies. Quiverfull arguments about the obligation to out-breed one's enemies vary from those offer by admitted white supremacists only by a few nouns.
Docreed2003
(16,876 posts)At how the evangelical community has embraced this charlatan....maybe they're hoping for a Pence presidency.
Sculpin Beauregard
(1,046 posts)They are cultists. They are a menace.
CousinIT
(9,257 posts)dalton99a
(81,590 posts)Orrex
(63,224 posts)meow2u3
(24,773 posts)Too many of us judge religions by the extreme fundamentalists who twist it for their own nefarious ends.
Demsrule86
(68,689 posts)any claim to morality again.
malaise
(269,175 posts)Only the gullible ever bought that BS.
Ilsa
(61,698 posts)People, like the lying steaming putrid sack of shit, as instruments of His will, and we should get good with it.
Then how are we supposed to tell the truly evil ones from those doing good when they have lived, and continue to live, disloyal, cheating, dishonest lives? Their logic doesn't hold water.
Liberalagogo
(1,770 posts)N/T
spanone
(135,880 posts)BarbD
(1,193 posts)We should remember the story of Jim Jones back in 1978 who convinced the over 900 members of his cult to drink the grape kool-aid laced with cyanide. I didn't understand the fatal loyalty then and don't understand the unwavering loyalty to Trump now.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,044 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,216 posts).
Having just finished a Religion course on this topic:
There is another reason why Trump scored a higher percentage of Evangelicals than any candidate in 30 years...
HRC got herself caught getting cut by a double-edged sword:
1) In an April 3, 2016 interview on Meet the Press Clinton angered both ProChoice and ProLife sides by stating:
The unborn person doesn t have constitutional rights."
Pro-Choicers were upset because she called the fetus a person thus giving legitimacy to the Pro-Life viewpoint.
ProLifers were offended that she denied any rights to a person while in the womb.
2) During the October 20, 2016 Presidential debate against Trump, Clinton was asked about her constitutional rights statement and position on late term abortions. Her response seemed to allow abortions all the way up through the 9th month with limitations.
Pro-Choicer were upset that she had any limitations at all.
Pro-Lifer Evangelicals saw this as extreme and many could not consider voting for her due to this issue.
===
3) Clinton campaign seems to have decided to write off" Evangelicals and did not reach out to them.
Obama exerted great effort to befriend Evangelicals and try to win their vote. The first appearance between Obama and McCain was in a televised forum at a major evangelical church. Likewise, Obama did an interview with Christianity Today magazine (The Evangelical magazine founded by Billy Graham and his fatherinlaw).
CT repeatedly tried to interview HRC and were denied access.
Ruth Graham of Slate Magazine has described the situation with Clinton and Evangelicals:
'She spent little energy explaining her views on abortion to them and little time talking about religious freedom. She didn 't hire a fulltime faith outreach director until June and had no one focused specifically on evangelical outreach. She didn 't give a major speech to the evangelical community and never met publically with evangelical leaders. Religious publications reaching out to her campaign with questions Were frequently met with silence. Some evangelical leaders are now asking." Why didnt Hillary Clinton even try to get us to vote for her?"
Michael Wear, Obamas 2012 Faith Outreach Director was quoted, in Slate, as saying the
"simple difference between Obama 's two presidential campaigns and Clinton's 2016 campaign is that Obama asked for the votes of white evangelicals and Clinton did not. "
Liberal Evangelical (yes, there are those) Ron Sider a Democrat and the founder of Evangelicals for Social Action was even more critical in his assessment:
I find it dumbfounding and incredibly stupid that the Democratic Party and her campaign didn 't reach out to try to engage a segment of the white evangelical community. Apparently they thought they could win without us. "
===
Is is estimated that HRC's campaign lost around 750,000 votes due to her disengagement.
26% of all voters in the 2016 election were white Evangelicals
... of the 26% 81% voted for Donald Trump.
... Hilary Clinton only received 16% of the white Evangelical vote
... Compare this to Barack Obama who, in 2008, received 26%.
===
Comparing the past several elections:
Trump 81%, HRC 16%
Romney (2012) 78%, Obama 22%
McCain (2008) 74%, Obama 26%
Bush (2004) 78%
I'm sure this post will catch crap, but that's part of the reason for her loss too.
.
paleotn
(17,970 posts)You're kidding, right? It doesn't break my heart one damn bit that HRC didn't cater to the christian taliban. Religious freedom, my fucking ass! There's a fucking church on every fucking corner in every fucking town in America. An American can barely get elected to local political office without kissing their fucking rings. Of all the mistakes HRC made in the last campaign, not kowtowing to the likes of those god bothering, fucking hypocrites is last one she should regret. If there ever was a hell, I hope the Grahams and all their ilk burn for fucking eternity.
How's that for catching crap. I hear you, but if it means losing rather than kissing christofacist ass, I'll take losing until this fucking country gets dragged kicking and screaming into the fucking 21 century.
OK....I'm done now.
TheBlackAdder
(28,216 posts).
There's reality and desire. Candidates must be able to separate the two.
Trump was sucking up to them left and right, hence his enhanced support. HRC left little incentive.
One example is the Catholic vs. Evangelical/Pentecostal enclaves of Metro Philadelphia.
I no longer have the exact supporting documentation, but the predominately Catholic sections if Northeastern Philly and Western New Jersey (directly across the river) showed typically high Democratic turnout, the more Evangelical and Pentecostal/Charismatic sections of Northwestern Philly showed a marked drop-off in turnout. They all share the same Philadelphia/New York media area, similar printed publications, but the turnout was dramatically different. People concentrated on Comey's statements, but that did not affect turnout in the Catholic enclaves mentioned above, why the Non-Catholic Christian ones? This is something that is still being researched, but standard pundits are not even looking into this phenomenon, just political and religious scholars.
.
paleotn
(17,970 posts)but it doesn't mean I have to like it. I suppose my view of evangelicals has a bit of a southern tinge to it...Grahams, Fallwell / Liberty and that ilk. That's my experience. Of course they cozied up to 45. They'd get in bed with the devil to further their aims. We on the left can pick off a few, as your stats suggest, but the core of them here in the south is as evil as Saudi wahhabism.
TheBlackAdder
(28,216 posts).
The more I research the Fundamental, Evangelical, Pentecostal, and Charismatic movements, the more I move to agnosticism and atheism. There are over 4,000 of these church groups, just in the US, because the pastors want their own flock to fleece. The perversions of the biblical passages to control and manipulate is just outright astonishing. Fallwell and his Liberty were always in the GOP's corner, so that doesn't bother me. Billy Graham was the spiritual advisor to every president from Ike onward... well, except for one. And we can guess who that one was. HRC should not have forsaken them, because Trump got Pence and others. She still had a shot and if she just held to what Obama did in his second round, she would have survived all this bullshit. When the like of Huckabee opens his mouth, I know that Christ is the farthest thing from his mind.
.
Sculpin Beauregard
(1,046 posts)lastlib
(23,288 posts)I think he's only the Electoral College's presidunce. Seems they're the only ones who wanted him there.
Personally, I hold women in VERY high esteem. I think most of the DU community does as well. He ain't ours.
Initech
(100,104 posts)And they get away with it, because, Jesus.
paleotn
(17,970 posts)Fucking religo-fascists who want to push their bullshit on the rest of us, no matter who they have to get in bed with to make it happen.....pun intended.
world wide wally
(21,755 posts)Evangelical Christian has absolutely NOTHING to do with any kind of religion. It is nothing more than a branch of the Republican Party that helps to swing elections and doesn't pay any taxes.
Like their leader; a fraud, a con, a scam.
Bleacher Creature
(11,257 posts)JI7
(89,271 posts)They were using religion as cover but they revealed themselves with support for trump.
Calculating
(2,957 posts)And are counting on the orange buffoon getting impeached.
VOX
(22,976 posts)Not that they haven't been purveyors of absolute lies for decades now.
But this time, they've completely revealed their true colors (and their white privilege) to the world. Their religion is a weapon.
They can take their fake "morality" and public piousness and shove them. High and tight.
RussBLib
(9,036 posts)still appealing to the baser instincts
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)mnmoderatedem
(3,729 posts)because the guy who has had multiple marriages, never attends church unless cameras are rolling, goes after married women "like a bitch" and brags about sexually assulting women and getting away with it embodies conservative Christian family values so perfectly.